/fa/ - Fashion

>>14161146
Ignore this fag, the thread is already up
>>14161105
>>14161105
>>14161105

>>14161146
Fine finishing, even 1941.

>>14161160
You always make threads too early and you're actually using my edit of the Rolex F91W lol.

>>14161168
Like you don't make every thread early..
Threadsplitfag.

>>14161146
Pardon my mistake on the thread video, I was going to use the 1815 but decided on this fresh edit. Here's the thread video: https://youtu.be/z8bw6y2mRcc

The finishing is interesting, the standards never change, they just get better. The mainspring barrel is still being finished the same way today, just look at this Zeitwerk Date.

>>14161146
Sauce on the background image?

>>14161195
Here you go. It's by Nicolas Trudgian, I removed his watermark to make it wallpaper-worthy.

>>14161216
Based. Thanks & HH brother.

>>14161223
HH (Haute Horlogerie) brother.

>>14161190
Even the click and click spring is the same and that’s true traditional design.

>>14161161
Paging anordain-anon. Can you give a review of your watch?

>>14161263
I'm still waiting on delivery. They've had a surge of orders recently so lead times are around 4-6 weeks atm.

I've no idea if the watch will look like a shitter or not but I have to praise their support team. They were super apologetic on the delay and offered an extra strap in compensation along with a leather watch case. They even recommended the best straps to pick depending on the dial color I chose. Better customer support than some high-end brands I've used.

>>14161248
Correct. This is just disproves people memeing about ALS “being started only in the late 90s thus having no heritage at all”.

>>14161270
That’s meme is so forced. Even if we assume it’s correct, the level of finishing and achievements made by Lange outweighs having “no heritage”.

That meme is so forced. Even if we assume it’s correct, the level of finishing and achievements made by Lange outweighs having “no heritage”.

>>14161270
But no one says that. Everyone knows about their history.

>>14161269
What color did you go with? That lead time sounds bad but that's nice of them and expected since they're a micro-brand trying to make it.

>>14161290
There are shitposters on /wt/ who mocks ALS though.

>>14161290
>>14161296
Here's one for example.

>>14161292
The red because why the hell not. I've got enough blue/white/black dial watches so went for something different.

>>14161307
That's going to be a tough piece to match. Gives me Nomos vibes though.

>>14161307
Looks like a ladies watch wtf is wrong with you

>>14161314
Well I like Nomos too so that's good.

>>14161318
kek. thanks bro, love u 2

>>14161331
Spending a grand on a copy of an eta 2824....just don't hand wind it OK?

I made little key rings using the same enamel process at school rofl XD

>>14161385
Then maybe you should be making keyrings for a living and selling them.

>>14161385
Pic of key rings?

This is the real thread because there's a real watch in the OP image

>>14161419
I don't have.
Kinda like this though that any one of a billion companies can make for peanuts.

That watch company would have you believe they studies lost hidden texts to learn how to coat a copper disc with enamel. They probably bash 50 out in 5 mins then take the rest of the week off after they finish up stamping the hands out of their can of special brew.

>>14161442

>>14161442
>>14161444
That's different though. There's a difference between enamelling a dial and paint filling a brass key ring/pin. 1k£ is a fair price to me. Consider the cost of living in the UK. Add the fact that it's being produced by a small studio. I highly doubt their profit margins are high, businesses need to survive they can't sell products for just the cost of material.

First for fine vintage timepieces

>>14161457
> 1k£ is a fair price to me
I agree. They look to be completely making the dial and the lettering by hand from scratch. That's certainly not a quick process.

Looks they designed the case too but it was manufactured elsewhere but desu that's common in the industry.

>>14160272

Where did you get the battery? What was the process of replacing it?

>>14161491
On their website they say that they can only make up to eight dials a week. Small studio indeed.

what are some watch brand that do more modern/futuristic designs that aren't cringe and zany

budget is 1000 - 1500$

pic related is an ikepod

>>14161537
6 or 8 people up in Scotland. Probably swigging Irn-Bru during the day and whisky in the evening while they slave over a hot kiln. Certainly more interesting than a lot of microbrands that just copy a Rolex, slap on their label, and ask for too much money.

>>14161553
Jesus Christ, so fucking accurate.

>>14161553
Reminds me of another brand as well.

>>14161553
That’s not true at all. Check out this new diver nomos is unveiling at baselworld

>>14161604
Flat bezel Calatrava rip-offs. Fucking nips.

Just gunna put this right here.

>>14161615
What's the point of another Rolex Submariner rip-off, I mean, homage?

>>14161659
It’s not. It’s nomos ingenuity and creativity

>>14161615

>>14161632
Now post the one where every other brand copies the Rolex originals.

>>14161673
Is that sarcasm? Could you expound further?

>>14161681

BUT BLANCPAIN VRO

Rate

>>14161746
kek

>>14161746
BASED AND REDPILLED

Uncle gifted me this today. I’ve always loved chronograph watches but this one looks a little bit too “bright”, I mostly use dark colored clothes tho so I think it’s going to make a good combo, the brightness of it with my overall style.

Also I’m going to change that hideous strap.

Seiko is shameless in ripping off Rolex. Font on the bezel is 99% the same. Fucking nips.

>>14161815
Ew

>>14161831
Based. Seiko only wishes they could be a part of the big 3 with Rolex, AP, and VC.

>seiko's typical owner

>>14161867
Fuck it’s like if his skin is made of some sort of synthetic material.

>>14161831
HEY BILL.

JUST GOT BACK FROM OUR FISHING TRIP IN FLORIDA. CAUGHT A 10 POUNDER, YA WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT. BY THE WAY, I GOT THIS DATEJUST LAST WEEK. NEW OLD STOCK, UNTOUCHED.

file:///C:/Users/FRANK/AppData/Local/Temp/DSC_1488.jpg

BY THE WAY, OL NANCY WAS BUGGING ME ABOUT BRENDA'S STEW RECIPE, WHEN ARE YOU GUYS COMING OVER AGAIN?


FRANK

>>14161831
Kek
The wrists on right (seikos) look like they belong to 10 year old sissies.

Anyone else having trouble logging into antiquorum.swiss? I can't sign on or even re-register.

>>14161146
Why does the reverso reverse? Isn't it better to have a cracked crystal from a bump than actually bumping the "back" of the movement?

>>14162117
no

>>14161723
>>14161632
>>14161787
Rolex made dive cases and movements for Panerai in the 40s, and Submariner came out the same year as the Fifty Fathoms and is obviously the better design, so fuck off with your fake news.

Do you morons actually think Seiko want to compete with Rolex?

Do any other manufacturers do that old man date magnification?
My grandad wants a watch and he has bad vision.

>>14162131
No. Seiko owners want to believe their GS are on par with Rolex so they can justify "choosing" cheaper watches.

>>14162131
When making upmarket watches competing with rolex is incidental

>>14162140
Get him a Lange 1. No need for a cyclops.

>>14162140
DO THIS. >>14162149 Your grandpa will be flexing at the bingo table.

This watch used to belong to my dad who I haven't seen for over 10 years now.

Should I have it repaired?

>>14162158
Why did you wait so long? Looks part-digital, the cell battery probably leaked already.

>>14162162
It was found only recently. Cleaning a leaked battery is not a big issue, but the lower left knob broke off. I don't even know whether it's possible to buy parts like that.

>>14162143
GS are better than Rolexes

>>14162196
Sure bud, sure. The only edge it has on Rolex is the polished edges of the hands and that's it. LOL.

>>14162175
Unless it’s extremely rare/ a 1 of 1, parts will be found.

Can I get a rate/opinion on a watch?
>SEIKO SNKK79K1
It's going to be my first automatic watch, I want something simple for everyday use. Is this alright?

Seamaster sold!
Do I buy a Datejust or a Leica M9?

>>14162222
>watch on right hand
Yeah a Rolex might be right up your alley.

>>14162214
can't go wrong with a seiko 5 really.
>>14162222
>Seamaster sold!
That defeats the purpose of buying it in the first place

>>14162228
I haven't found too much info on that particular watch. Just found it in a store for a pretty good price. I'm worried it might be a bit too small.

>>14162232
I'm guessing there's sparse information because of the sheer number of different seiko5 models. There are simply too many to review. Anything with a 7s26 movement should give you an idea of what to expect.

>>14162232
Searching for SNKK79 may work better K1 just means made in korea

>>14162227
Gerd-Rüdiger Lang.

>>14161604
Yeah.

>>14162222
You have a decent watch already, get the Leica if you are certain you will use it.

>>14162127
>Rolex made dive cases and movements for Panerai in the 40s, and Submariner came out the same year as the Fifty Fathoms and is obviously the better design, so fuck off with your fake news.
None of this cope changes the fact that the Fifty Fathoms came first, and the Submariner (and the Turnograph before it) is a Fifty Fathoms ripoff.

>>14161746
Three of those four Rolexes are Blancpain ripoffs.

>>14161831
Both Rolexes are Blancpain ripoffs though.

>>14161815

>>14161815
Throw it in the trash where it belongs.

Anyone want to guess what this movement is?

>thread where everyone buys < $2k watches complaining that GS and Rolex aren't good enough for them again
Why?

>>14162275
>>14162277
So you are saying then that Seiko are a copy of a copy. That's even worse.

>>14162406
The Blancpain copied earlier designs too.
So the Rolex is itself a copy of a copy.
And for all we know Seiko copied Blancpain as well.

Why pretend you weren't BTFO the first time?

>>14162415
This.

>>14162413
Not quite. Rolex used the original Fifty Fathoms as the basis for a design, many brands did back then, and then went their own way with it. There's enough examples in this thread of Seiko simply doing a 100% copy of a Rolex watch but to be fair to Seiko many other brands do the same as well these days.

>>14162415
What's your point? No one denies watch brands have copied others historically. Three of those examples haven't been produced for decades. The one that remains is the most well know watch design in the world and almost every other watch brand has their version of the Sub.

>>14162424
>Rolex used the original Fifty Fathoms as the basis for a design
yup

>There's enough examples in this thread of Seiko simply doing a 100% copy of a Rolex watch
You mean like Rolex doing 100% copies of other brands' watches here: >>14162415
?

>>14162427
Who does Rolex copy *today* ? All the Seiko copies are modern pieces. Why would Rolex imitate others when everyone imitates them?

>>14162428
>Who does Rolex copy *today* ?
Half their lineup is composed of variations on the Fifty Fathoms blueprint; including all the highly coveted models.

>>14162424
Nice backpedaling. Either copying makes you a shit brand, or it doesn't really matter. Making exceptions just makes you look like a blind retard.

>>14162428
That just means they weren't original from almost the very beginning.

>>14162415
> FF -> Sub
Design inspired by the original, made over 60 years ago and improved on ever since. No one except for some watch nerds remembers the FF anymore.

>>14161746
> Rolex -> Seiko
100% exact copies, made now.

Seiko fanbois mad.

>>14162415
>>14162416
Samefagging so hard

>>14162214
Lol.

When you want to be Rolex so bad... Vintage white gold Day-Date on the left, Seiko in steel on the right.

BUT THE BLANCPAIN FIFTY FATHOMS VROOOOOOO

>>14162454
cope

The Rolex Submariner was based on the Turn-O-Graph ref. 6202, which predates the Blancpain's Fifty Fathoms.

>>14162438
>when Rolex does it, it's "inspiration"
>when Seiko does it, it's "copies"

Big yikes from my end.

>>14162465
see >>14162415

>>14162482
>Turn-O-Graph ref. 6202, which predates the Blancpain's Fifty Fathoms
No it doesn't.

>>14162483 There's a big difference between something based upon a design and something that's an exact replica. If you can't tell the difference I pity you.

>>14162493
Except none of those Seikos: >>14161746
are "exact copies" you retard.

They're about at the same level as these >>14162415

>>14162488

>The Rolex Turn-o-graph was released at Basel 1953, before the Fifty Fathoms or the Sub.
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/does-rip-off-affect-original-2202537-9.html#post18729730

>The Submariner was based on the Rolex Turn-o-graph 6202, which predated the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms.
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/what-very-first-rolex-submariner-homage-4836915-post47541777.html#post47541777

>The Fifty Fathoms was introduced in 1953, which was the same year that the Rolex Turn-o-graph 6202 was introduced, although the 6202 was released a few months before the Fifty Fathoms
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/rolex-vs-blancpain-3336602-post31905202.html#post31905202


>the Fifty Fathoms came before the Submariner, but the Rolex Turn-o-graph 6202 predated both of them
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/mistaken-indentity-2829674-post25264946.html#post25264946

>>14162496
Hahaha. No.

I'm fine with Seiko but come on bro, that's obviously wrong.

>>14162498
>The Rolex Turn-o-graph was released at Basel 1953
The FF came out before.

"At the end of 1952 and through the beginning of 1953, the first French navy’s scuba diver unit was created, as a result of cooperation between the French Navy and the Secret Services."
https://www.revolution.watch/dossier-brief-history-of-the-blancpain-fifty-fathoms/?archive

>>14162507
So explain how any of these are "exact replicas": >>14161746

Who did it best?
>>14161746
Seiko
Rolex
Rolex
Seiko
>>14162415
Blancpain
Rolex
Rolex
Vacheron Constantine

>>14162511
Excluding the diver the bezel, bracelets, color scheme, dials, indices, typeface are all identical. How are those not an exact copies?

>>14162521
1) "exact replica" means more than that
2) the same level of copying is present in all of these: >>14162415

>>14162521
Forget it anon, you can't win. The autists will never acknowledge a single bad thing about their precious Seiko.

Rolex Zerographe ref. 3346 from 1937. The dial seems familiar.

>>14162533
BUT MUH BLANCPAIN VRO

>>14162533
>>14162538
>Rolex Zerographe
Copy of the Weems watches.

>>14162510
And? Was it released to the public then? Was it seen by the public then? You think Rolex is getting scoops from the French Navy?

>>14162539
Lol, arrogant see > poster moving the goalposts again, a classic.

>>14162544
It was known, absolutely.
The French navy guys knocked on a few doors with that basic design even before they got to BP.

How is this an argument? Who cares about who copied who in the 1960's and earlier. The Sub today looks nothing like the FF of the past and everyone today copies that watch. That includes Seiko despite what those few keep spazing about.

>>14162546
>moving the goalposts
What?

>>14162468
http://people.timezone.com/jmerino/history50.pdf

>>14162468
>>14162560

>>14162555
Dial design, you keep saying Rolex based their current dials on the Fifty Fathoms when you can see they already had a variation of it in 1937 and then you come out and say it's a copy of Weems.

>>14162560
>>14162562

See >>>14162533

1937. They already had a variation of the Sub dial as we know it today.

>>14162568
>you keep saying Rolex based their current dials on the Fifty Fathoms when you can see they already had a variation of it in 1937
And that variation was based on the Weems watches.

>>14162571
See >>14162572

The Weems basic design patent was applied for in 1929.

>>14162572
>And that variation was based on the Weems watches.
I know which dial variation is closer to the Submariner and it's not the Weems.

>>14162582
>I know which dial variation is closer to the Submariner
So do I.
This one: >>14162562

>>14162583
Came out in 1953, Zerographe 1937.

>>14162586
But the Submariner (and Turnograph) dial layout is copied from this: >>14162562

>>14162588
It's not though, Rolex modified their 1937 Zerographe dial.

>>14162599
>Rolex modified their 1937 Zerographe dial.
... to look like this one >>14162562

>>14162601
The Fifty Fathoms looks like a Zerographe copy to me.

>>14162605
And the Zerographe is a copy of the Weems watches.
I always said the FF took its design cues from earlier watches too.
But the iconic dial design came from the FF.

Got a free watch today.

A fellow collector/compulsive hoarder friend gave it to me.

>>14162266
and what's that ripping off?

>>14161556
check out sevenfriday?

>>14162624
Read the discussion, it's not about ripping off it's about different models from the same brand all looking the same.
The Rolex Submariner, Deep Sea, Sea Dweller, GMT Master II, Explorer II, Yacht Master, Daytona, ... all have the same design.

>>14162610
>After all, we agreed with a small watch factory, Blancpain, to develop our project: a watch with a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings, as well as an outer rotating bezel... -Captain Maloubier

>a watch with a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings, as well as an outer rotating bezel

>black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings

>bold numerals

Seems like they got it right, the first Fifty Fathoms had bold numerals and clear markings. Picrel is on the very first page of: http://people.timezone.com/jmerino/history50.pdf

https://monochrome-watches.com/watchtime-wednesday-history-blancpain-fifty-fathoms/

>>14161871
lmfao anon

>>14162635
There are numerals on the bezel, and that same source also says this >>14162562
is the first FF.

And if you look back far enough you always find the sources of inspiration, like pic related which has the same dial layout (round indices with batons at 3, 6, 9), minus the triangle at 12.

>>14162643
That Panerai is from 1938 btw.

Point is the FF was the first dive watch as we still know it today, combining elements from a number of previous designs.

>>14162631
Different anon here. I partially agree, each brand has their own design language they stick to. Personally I think there's more variation in those Rolex models than in the Grand Seiko shown earlier.

I had to laugh at the Nomos >>14161553. While do have lots of different designs they have a habit of releasing multiple coloured versions of the exact same watch.

>>14162648
>Personally I think there's more variation in those Rolex models than in the Grand Seiko shown earlier.
Suuuuuuuuuuure you do.

>>14162648
>Personally I think there's more variation in those Rolex models than in the Grand Seiko shown earlier.
No you don't.

>>14162643
>A watch with a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings,

>>14162270
this is the biggest meme lie in the world. and i'll tell you why, because if you just take 2 sec's to google the 1953 originals they are nothing alike. you fucks think just because the case is round and without crown guards rolex ripped blancpain off? nooo... rolex had a completely different syled bezel and the dial didn't even have arabics. and the hands are different. they share as much in common as any two dive watches you can pick

>>14162649
Huh? I said it was my _personal_ opinion.

> GMT Bezel
Instantly recognisable
> Daytona Dial
Instantly recognisable
> Datajust
Instantly recognisable
> Sub Case and Bezel
Instantly recognisable

I look at this >>14161604 and _personally_ I see little difference between many of those watches. Doesn't mean I don't like a few of them. That gold dress watch and the cream dial are nice.

>>14162667
See >>14162562

>>14162669
See >>14162562
and >>14162560

>>14162675
See >>14162635, first page of http://people.timezone.com/jmerino/history50.pdf

>>14162671
>Huh? I said it was my _personal_ opinion.
Your personal opinion has nothing to do with the fact that these two >>14162660
are virtually 100% identical.

>>14162679
This >>14162562
is from the same source.

And see >>14162643

Thoughts on the seiko fifty fathoms? It was released right before pearl harbor got btfo.

>>14162678
really bro, just because the blancpain beat rolex to the market doesn't mean shit. they had been designing them for years

>>14162683
Yes, those two look incredibly similar. Which is why I never listed them here >>14162671 because the rest are not similar.

>>14162687
>just because the blancpain beat rolex to the market doesn't mean shit.
If you say so.

>>14162669
>they share as much in common as any two dive watches you can pick
Because pretty much 99% of dive watches after the FF borrowed the same basic design elements.

>>14162684

>>14162688
And the Deep Sea, GMT Master II, Explorer II, Yacht Master, Daytona, ... also have the same design.

Same case, same basic dial layout, same bezel with markings, ...

ROLEX SUB WAS FASHIONED AFTER THE TURN O GRAPH. ROLEX HAD USED SCREW DOWN CROWNS FOR 25 YEARS BEFORE BLANCPAIN. WHERE DID BLANCPAIN GET THERE IDEAS? BLANCPAIN IS NOW A SWATCH. KEK

>>14162691
See >>14162684

I don't know why you're having such difficulty.
Considering that source is ambivalent, those two versions probably came out at the same time.

ROLEX HAD A WATERPROOF CASE BY 1927 WHICH WAS TESTED IN THE ENGLISH CHANEL. I WONDER WHERE BLANCPAIN GOT THERE WATERPROOF CASE IDEA FROM. HMMM

EITHER WAY, PANERAI'S DIVE WATCH CAME OUT IN THE 1930'S. SO EVERYONE STFU

>>14162688
>the rest are not similar

>>14162415
>>14162424
>>14162427
>>14162428
>>14162430
>>14162432
>>14162433
>>14162438
>>14162454
>>14162465
>>14162468
>>14162480
>>14162482
>>14162483
>>14162485
>>14162488
>>14162493
>>14162496
>>14162498
>>14162507
>>14162510
>>14162511
>>14162515
>>14162521
>>14162524
>>14162528
>>14162533
>>14162538
>>14162539
>>14162544
>>14162546
>>14162547
>>14162552
>>14162555
>>14162560
>>14162562
>>14162568
>>14162571
>>14162572
>>14162576
>>14162582
>>14162583
>>14162586
>>14162588
>>14162599
>>14162601
>>14162605
>>14162610
>>14162615
>>14162624
>>14162626
>>14162631
>>14162635
>>14162637
>>14162643
>>14162647
>>14162648
>>14162649
>>14162660
>>14162667
>>14162669
>>14162671
>>14162675
>>14162678
>>14162679
>>14162683
>>14162684
>>14162685
>>14162687
>>14162688
>>14162690
>>14162691
>>14162695
>>14162698
>>14162700
>>14162704
>>14162707
Rolex created the first waterproof case, forcing Omega to think of a way to come up with their own design, which led to the ‘case on case’ patent, hence, creating the first dive watch in the technical sense.

Panerai did not believe the Omega to be good enough for the Italian Navy, and so, decided to strike a partnership with Rolex, resulting in the first military dive watch.

Blancpain, having observed all of the above, set about improving the original incarnations and came out with the first modern dive watch.

No one company deserves more credit than the other. They were all great watchmakers who were working collectively (though unknowingly) to create that one watch that could go as deep as possible.

Why do all the Seiko posters get so mad when you try and say they aren't the most perfect, most original and best brand ever?

Chill out guys, you are just making everyone hate them.

Got this Seiko advertisment on my Instagram.

>>14162714
The basic layout for what we know today as "dive watches" was put together by Blancpain, using:
-rotating bezel from Weems watches (afaik the unidirectionality was an innovation by Blancpain)
-round indices with batons at 3, 6, 9 from the 1938 Panerai
-waterproofing from all kinds of previous watch tech (plus some patented innovations)
etc.

>>14162720
EXACTLY. FUCKING BLANCPAIN TROLLS.

>>14162720
>-round indices with batons at 3, 6, 9 from the 1938 Panerai

Zerographe, 1937.


>After all, we agreed with a small watch factory, Blancpain, to develop our project: a watch with a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings, as well as an outer rotating bezel...

>a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings

-Captain Maloubier

>bought an alpinist for pretty cheap on a whim
>suddenly double in price because they're discontinued
gonna flip this watch to some retard on reddit for mad profit ama

>>14162729
>>-round indices with batons at 3, 6, 9 from the 1938 Panerai
>Zerographe, 1937.
Yeah, nice round indices jackass.

>>a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings
>Captain Maloubier
Bold numerals AND clear markings.
So he was probably referring to the numerals on the bezel.

>>14162735
NIB?
How much?

>>14162743
>batons at 3, 6, 9 from the 1938 Panerai
>BATONS

>he was probably
>PROBABLY

>>14162751
>BATONS
Batons yes.

>he was probably
>PROBABLY
More like "apparently".

>>14162745
not new, probably used it a dozen times. think i paid like 300us at the time

>>14162763
Was it new though when you bought it?

>>14162743
>a watch with a black dial, large, bold numerals and clear markings, as well as an outer rotating bezel

If he was referring to the bezel he wouldn't have said "as well as an outer rotating bezel" after describing the dial.

>>14162754
Batons from a 1938 Panerai when the Zerographe from 1937 has the Triangle at 12 and the batons.

>>14162764
it was my dude

>>14162735
>>14162763
> $300
> mad profit
ok ....

>>14162766
>If he was referring to the bezel he wouldn't have said "as well as an outer rotating bezel" after describing the dial.
The fact remains that one of, if not THE first, Fifty Fathoms was this: >>14162562

But it does not even matter because that dial layout with round indices and batons already existed in 1938 from Panerai, see >>14162643

>Batons from a 1938 Panerai when the Zerographe from 1937 has the Triangle at 12 and the batons.
More like round indices + batons from a 1938 Panerai.

>>14162770
And you only wore it a dozen times, so it pretty much still looks like new right?

>>14162778
i didnt expect the ama to be this through
but yeah looks new

>>14161604
Ref. 96 Pateks, iconic flat-bezels. 1932. Where the Calatrava hailed from. Lol @ those """""Grand"""""" Seikos.

>>14162785
Thing is, my Alpinist got dropped in the middle of the road (took off with it on the lid of my truck bed when I got the news my wife was pregante), and I've had this growing urge to get a new one.

>>14162795

>>14162799
You don't think Panerai invented that layout, do you?

>>14162808
yes they did, disprove me

Updated:

>>14162809
Do you have some kind of mental deficiency?

>>14162813
Four out of five of those Rolexes are Fifty Fathoms homages.

>>14162815
Same guy who said an ad paid for by Seiko on Instagram wasn't a Seiko ad. He's nuts.

>>14162815
>posts a watch from the 1940's
blancpain is shit why do you shill them so hard? do you think they will send you one for free or something?

>>14162815
oh yah, what exactly did blancpain do that's original then? waterproofness from rolex and the dial/hands from panerai lmao.

>>14162824
>>14162827
He's shilling them as an excuse >>14162817
because he can't accept this >>14162813

>>14162824
>>posts a watch from the 1940's
1920s actually.

>>14162827
>oh yah, what exactly did blancpain do that's original then?
Why the fuck are you asking me?
Google it you fuckwit.

1930. Rolex-made Panerai.

>>14162834
don't have to the only thing they did is make a bi-rotating bezel their dive watch. WOW, thank god rolex did the hard part for them of actually waterproofing the fucking thing.

>>14162842
Guess you know better than the entire watch world. Good for you anon!

>>14161860
Are you fucking retarded? Rolex is not, nor will it ever be, a part of the holy trinity.
It will always be Audemars Piguet, Vacheron Constantin, and Patek Philippe.
Shame on all you fucking autistic Fucks for not correcting this.

>>14162270
you're a fucking idiot

Rolex filed a patent for the dial design. Keep in mind, in 1937 already had the Zerographe released, this timeline explores the Rolex-Panerai connection.
Full pic: https://watchengines.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170613-panerai-timeline.jpg

I love it when real watch lovers call out the hypocrites in this thread.

Rolex filed a patent for the dial design. Keep in mind, in 1937 already had the Zerographe released, this timeline explores the Rolex-Panerai connection.

Full pic: https://watchengines.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/170613-panerai-timeline.jpg

>>14162879
Your point?

>>14162719
That’s the SEIKO “TRIBUTE TO BEN 10” Edition bro

>>14162892
Ben 10 reissue when?

Seiko is actually worse than invicta

>>14162892
Except those watches are tool watches that have history. They were made big so that they could be easily read underwater during saturation diving.

>>14162714
Why did you spend all that time quoting all of those posts?

Apologies if it’s not the case, but I think you are a homosexual. For clarification I mean you like having dicks in your bum.

>>14162897
>History.
Submariner. Sea-Dweller. Deepsea.

>>14162898
When your a hardcore fanboy and ride rolex’s dick all day everyday you have to make sure you call out every blasphemer to protect their honor.

Lmao, Seiko got cucked on having the grandseiko.com domain.

>>14162897
>muh tool watch

lmao, he doesn't know they use dive computers

>>14162902
at least i can afford one hahaa

Update on an old favourite

>>14162930
I'd rather see a Lange on a Casio catalogue.

>>14162719
at that size might as well get a casio gulfmaster

Why did it go all quiet

>>14162900
>Original Seiko design
>but submariner
>Seiko sub homages
>ree Seiko copied le rolex

>>14162909
They didn’t have dive computers back in the 70’s.

Would be perfect without all the buttons on the left

this thread is pathetic.
Get on my level. Just sad.

> Your budget
500€

> Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, flieger, etc...
bauhaus - dress

> Desired bracelet option, e.g. leather, nylon, metal
brown leather

> Desired watch size, e.g. 17cm / 38mm
30-35mm

>>14162900
>>14162909
That seiko is actually a product of input from divers. That;s why it has the stupid looking shroud

Got given this watch earlier, it's going to look ridiculous no matter what I do.

>>14163092
ouch. I hope the giver wasn't anyone close to you

>>14163092
Christ.
Would almost be acceptable at 39mm or so. Almost. It would still be a tw steel though

>>14163055
Junghans quartz model

>>14162131
They actually do lmaoooo
Seiko said it themselves hahahahaha
Seiko derangement syndrome has reaped yet another victim

>>14163187
desu it's not even a competition

>>14162131
> Do you morons actually think Seiko want to compete with Rolex?
Yes. Seiko have said it themselves that they want Grand Seiko to compete.

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/grand-seiko-united-states-move-upmarket

>>14163232
LMAOOOO this retard is still pulling uo macros HAHAHAHAHA
SEETHING söyko, you will NEVER be seen as a luxury brand HAHAHAHA

>>14163232
Some nice polishing makes it a better watch? Hahahaha, no.

>>14163241
>LMAOOOO this retard is still pulling uo macros
Guess who also likes to pull up macros? (shooped, of course)

>>14163242
That pic shows more than just "nice polishing", it also shows better printing, better dial details, and better alignment of features.

And "some nice polishing" is a large part of what makes a watch valuable, see Lange, Dufour, ...

>>14163250
How many Grand Seiko's do you own? Post pics

>>14163248
>Look Stacey he's wearing a Seiko
>OMG Becky don't be mean that's a GRAND Seiko

>>14163250
Everyone remember that when / if you ever meet someone wearing a GS to pull out the loupe you must keep on you at all times. Otherwise how will you ever know it's better than a Rolex!

>>14163241
And Rolex will never be considered high end.

>>14163232

>>14163269
Philippe dufour and Lange BTFO!

>>14163269
Rough hands are visible from a mile a way when the light hits them.

>>14163280
Tell me about it! Dufour and Lange will just have to rely on their inferior design, dials, cases and movements instead ... oh .. wait.

>>14163293
So you don't need a loupe to appreciate Dufour and Lange finishing?

>TGV makes a Lorier video
>/wt/ shits on it
I actually really like the look and design of the Neptune though. Is it wrong to want it?

>>14163315
Why would you care about what others think? Just buy it if you like it.

>>14163301
Nice job on completely avoiding the point.

>>14163315
Another sub rip off shitter.

>>14163355
I'm getting you back on point retard.

>>14163241
Do you know who the GS macro poster reminds me of? A Flat Earth conspiracy believer.

He saw some videos on the internet, thinks they know the answer to the world, cherry picks images, refuses to acknowledge they could be wrong, thinks everyone else is out to get him, ignores simple logic, gets angry that no one agrees with his view.

>>14163369
That's kind of the point...

>>14163241
>uo macros
I'm old so UO macros means something else.

>>14163388
The fact that GS has superior external finishing is a very well-known fact retard.

>>14161870
>gingers

Thank again to sexy beer glass poster, arrived in the post yesterday

>>14163434
It is not. And they're not. Only their cases are particuarly good.

>>14163448
>dubbel
Kid pls

>>14163461
>It is not.
>And they're not.
>Only their cases are particuarly good.

>There are very few watches from any manufacturer that can withstand very close scrutiny of dial furniture through a macro lens but Grand Seiko watches not only acquit themselves well, they actually look better and better the closer you look, which is certainly not usually the case.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/grand-seiko-hi-beat-36000-gmt-limited-edition-sbgj227-peacock-hands-on

>I’d put this Grand Seiko’s hands and indices up against those found on most of Switzerland’s high end watches with confidence that they are as good or better than most of what's out there.
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/three-on-three-grand-seiko-omega-rolex-automatics

t. editor-in-chief at Hodinkee.

You know there's medication to help you cope with reality, right?

>>14163502

>>14163512
Beautiful finishing as always from GS.

>>14163514
It's horrible af

>>14163502
It's good but it has flaws like you'd expect from that price class.

>>14163502
You are ridiculously obsessed with GS, we get it. However you may as well stop posting since no one cares. I've seen shills with less one track minds.

>>14163502
Flaws are mostly just seen with macro, so that's good to know, but they're not excellent.

>>14163517
The fuck are you talking about?

>>14163520
>it has flaws like you'd expect from that price class.
lmao, pic related

>>14163522
Are you talking to the Hodinkee editor in chief?
Because he obviously isn't reading your shit.

>>14163524
Damn, now that's desperation

>>14163528
> the Hodinkee editor
So you base your opinions solely based on someone on the internet. Yikes.

>>14163576
>GS having amazing finishing isn't a well-known fact!!
>Why would you point out that the Hodinkee editor-in-chief says GS has amazing finishing?

lmao, dat cope

>>14163478
How dare I try a beer I've not had before

>>14163580
You still haven't said how many GS you own? Come on, we all want to see them.

>>14163591
>I have no arguments yet I must post

>>14163601
So that would be zero then. Your opinion is worthless.

>>14163591
And how many do you own? By your own logic you should shut the fuck up about them unless you own them.

>>14163621
I'm not the one posting how GS are the best watch brand ever.

Jesus fucking Christ, you idiots let that anti-Seiko shitposter permanently ruin these threads by feeding him (You)s. Thank fuck I stopped here. Guess I'll check back in another six months.

>>14163632
Well since you don't own any GS's your opinion on them is worthless, again by your own logic.

>>14163632
I'm not posting about GS being the best watch brand ever, I'm posting what is common knowledge.

>>14163635
It's so tempting though.

Well it's Friday, /wt/ is falling apart again. Fucking frustrated wagecucks.

>>14163714
Just in time for the weekend shitfest, see you on Monday

>>14162906
Kek it's real

What are some good watch channels on YT?

What are /wt/core?

>>14163890
Maybe a bit pretentious but I like watchfinder & co.

grand seiko has better case finishing but the para chrome spring inside the rolex makes gs buyers look idiotic. also

>spring drive is not mechanical

The only edge Grand Seiko has over Rolex is that they polish the edges of the hands, and that’s it. That’s why Grand Seiko sells 40% off brand new, full-set box & papers and Rolex prices are sky-high on the grey & 2nd hand market.

>>14164164
What website

>>14164164
>Manufactured objects have no objective qualities which can be used to evaluate the workmanship that went into creating then
>Instead, only the perceived social status conferred on you by ownership of the brand is important
It's incredible to see how modern marketing methods have succeeded in turning consumers into zombified brain-dead buypigs, uninterested and unable to evaluate quality and value in any objective way.

>>14164286
To be fair, you need marketing to be "tricked" into buying any watch over a thousand or so

>>14164327
There are discernible increases in quality at every pricepoint if you focus on the companies that take manufacturing quality seriously rather than those that spend more per watch on marketing than manufacturing.

That said, you have to be a bit of an autist to appreciate the extra work that goes into watches at more expensive price points.

>>14163424
what does it mean old man?

New thread:

>>14164836
>>14164836
>>14164836

>>14164164
GS also does a ton more hand finishing on the cases, dials, indices as well.

Mr. Cool Guy comes into the store for a battery change, with a fake G-Shock MR-G. I don't think it was even copying a real model.

Hope I managed to properly hide my contempt and disgust, else it would have been unprofessional.

>>14164879
>FAKE WATCHES ARE FOR FAKE PEOPLE

Stop crying, wagie.

Finally got piece i like, what do you think of it?

>>14165152
Too big

>>14165152
>not getting the curv

>>14165152
Stupid date window.

>>14165152
Looks good!